Professor Chomsky, with all due respect, I don't like you very much. But probably if you knew me well, you wouldn't like me, either. But, if you were as willing as I am to have a two-way dialogue, it would be a lively one. You would find that I agree with many of your conclusions, but believe you blame the U.S. as a people, as if we had the bit in our mouth, and were running U.S. foreign policy, shaping the political parties' rhetoric, writing and approving or disapproving the laws of our land. How devoutly I wish that we did. Even seemingly sound philosophical presumptions must be tested against consequences. Indeed, sudden relief from kingdom or dictatorship in the Middle East today might well result in our having to defend ourselves from the vengeance of those in its population who view of us as satanical infidels who wear our claims of morality and political democracy only to mask our insatiable greed and Machiavellian motive to exploit them in every conceivable way. Suppose we were to encourage the free and uninhibited expression of such sentiments, even to the extent of their pulling out all the stops to wreak revenge upon us. Would you find that a refreshingly proper resolution of our nation's guilt? As for me, I view wise foreign policy as needing first to survive, and then to improve morally.

Activista, I understand what Chomsky wrote, although I asked him (in an open blog way) for his feelings on a specific issue. Your comment shows evidence of a severe deficiency of knowledge about Europe and the failure of the U.S.S.R. Even a cursory grasp of the history of WWII reveals that Europe was destined to end up being dominated by one of two fascist states -- one professing falsely to be about German Nationalism and the other falsely professing to be about Marxist socialism. Some historians are convinced that ultimate victory by the U.S.S.R. was the most probable, but would have taken many more years to reach a terminus. Some also are convinced that the strategic purpose of the atom bomb was not so much to hasten the surrender of Japan as to give Stalin pause in contemplating pushing onward after the German surrender. Economically, the Marshall Plan and U.S. rebuilding in Japan made enormous differences in Europe's economic recovery. And, also, the Cold War between Russia and the West stressed the U.S.S.R. because it constrained them to spend more than they could afford on military defense. The Cold War also played a major role in leading to the current indebtedness of the U.S., although it was not, by far, the only factor. You seem to know just enough to make up own history as you go along.

George, in a blog such as this we are forced to sacrifice a lot of detail for sake of space. Let me cut Activista a little slack. I sense he has a lot of baggage; but he may have come by that honestly in his life.

U.S. foreign policy has been in some ways empirical, yet in some ways helpful.

Where to start??? The U.S. did not win WWII but DID help by tipping the scale against a complete takeover of Europe by the U.S.S.R.

The U.S. did (through many, many billions spent on defense and defense-related R & D) make the U.S.S.R. overspend. We (not democracy) helped the Afghans drive out the Russians by supplying them with arms.

The U.S. did, by way of the Marshall Plan seed rebuilding in Europe at a very crucial time.

Jumping back in time, the U.S. once saved millions of Russians from starving by shipping them grain.

The U.S. made it possible for Germany and Japan to build back bigger and better than ever after WWII.

The U.S. prevented the massacre of many MUSLIMS in Bosnia.

I don't agree that we "changed." We've done things bad countries do, and we've done things on the good side that no other country can match. Running out of space here. But, in a nutshell, there are two sides worth telling... and just a dissident side alone would War and Peace look like a short story.

To Ken Hall,

Point well taken.

Much that has been wrong with U.S. policy has been commercially influenced. For that matter, much that has been wrong with a lot of nations has been commercially driven.

Ike Eisenhower warned against the newly acquired affluence of American industry (what he called the "military industrial complex" at the end of WWII.

The ONLY HOPE U.S. citizens have of wresting back from the (formerly American but now global mega corporations) is if the citizens put aside differences over less dangerous things and band together against what is fast turning into a CORPORATOCRACY.

The U.S. citizens have been conned by experts, Ken, who have divided us among ourselves over issues that distract us while our power to influence policy has been stolen away. Hopefully blogs like this one are beginning to find articulation for what the problem is, and how important, and how hard the citizens will have to put aside lesser issues and join to get back any balance of power...

Activista,

I do not discern President Obama as being a man lacking in empathy for the innocent children or other non-combatants. The nature of warfare today is far less murderous than the warfare of earlier times when incendiary bombs or nuclear bombs were dropped on entire cities. Military technology has advanced in ways that have drastically reduced what the military calls "collateral damage."

My heart aches for any child or innocent who suffers in a war. But war is hell. And if there is war, and combatants of one side bomb buses, and restaurants, and public squares, and then hide among non-combatants, they play a role in exposing those non-combatants.

There is more to all this than you or I can witness.

All the wrong-doing is not on one side, only.

Many of us have been sent to war and never knew anything but what we saw and heard. We wonder. We doubt. We hope. We wish to know who to believe. We see the harm the enemy does to our side. We shoot back. And if we are lucky, we survive.

I have just put Chomsky's books on my must read list, behind more than two dozen. The list grows, but the books on it also get read.

So much to learn. So little time...

It's unbelievable how the inmense USian population rejects the truth by people like Noam Chomsky. The situation in the US begins by having a fictional Democracay; the will of the majority cannot exist in a country that does not vote. When a Pres. is elected with 5i% of the 60% electoral participation, he does not represent more than 31% of the will of the total population. The USians are totally manipulated; they talk about Liberty and Freedom while denying it to Puerto Rico and the over half a million natives who want the independece and freedom of their country. The foundation of the US on lies and manipulations is what will bring it down sooner than spected.

"Love" needs to encompass not only one's self, one's family and one's nation but also one's "human beings", one's "world". Globalization is not just an economic outburst but the opportunity to become conscious of our selves as one people on one planet. If we cannot move beyond the horrors that every nation has done to its own people and others then we cannot move into a sphere of an objective humanity working for its well being everywhere. Our problems are no longer local but global.

The American people are responsible for their leaders as much as the leaders are responsible for the American people and imperialism is an aggressive destructive mode that needs to be stopped. But everyone in every nation is equally responsible for the American people and its leaders as much as their own. Every individual is responsible for everything and each must speak out and protect it.

Hi Jeenious,

Thanks for the joke, I did enjoy it and yet you didn't really address the issues presented and buffered them with the idea that human nature has not changed in all recorded history which is as false a statement as you dare to make it.

Tell me, what hasn't changed in the short span of your life? Do you not dare change? Everything is changing without the approval of those who are unwilling to change because the only truly unchangeable aspect of the human being is that each generation we renew our selves and reinstate human values that had gotten stepped over by the instinctive forces of the previous generation.

It is not with friendly, kind individuals unwilling to take a firm step towards freedom from abuse that we'll step into the consciousness of our humaneness but with courageous strong individuals willing to stand up for what is necessary: No more waste of money and lives in the military; redistribution of everything where it is most needed. Human life above every other interest. Call criminals by their name when life is abused anywhere.

Stop the hierarchization of the human being in academic, social, national and economic strata. Everyone is equally human and has equal rights.

From ACLU

Did you hear about this? Literally in a midnight session last week, the House Armed Services Committee tucked a dangerous provision into the huge Defense authorization bill. With it, Congress took one more step towards passing a law for endless worldwide war. The new law would use American military forces against terrorism suspects everywhere and anywhere.

If you didn't hear about this provision, you're not alone.

It was added to the bill by Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), and it could become the single biggest ceding of unchecked war authority to the executive branch in modern American history.

Outrageously, there have been no hearings on the worldwide war legislation, nor has its necessity been explained by Rep. Buck McKeon or anyone else in Congress.

A House vote could come as early as next week. Tell your representative: Oppose any law for a new worldwide war without end. (Do not forward: This link will open a page with your information already filled in.)

Unlike the legislation that authorized the Afghanistan War and the pursuit of Osama bin Laden, the proposed new and expanded law to go to war does not even require a specific threat of harm to the United States.

Laura Murphy

Director, ACLU Washington Legislative Office